|
Dunhill_BKK -> RE: new wargame "War across the Pacific 1941-1945" (8/16/2005 10:00:20 AM)
|
I thought I'd add my two bits to this resurrected post.
How many of us, and by us I mean the set of folks who fit the term grognard, have purchased games they've never played. I am one of the folks who purchased Campaign for North Africa, just for the fact that it was hyped as such a detailed, huge game. Understand I was only about 10-13 at the time, but I reckon I've purchased WITP for the same reason. I am looking for a level of detail that I find interesting and challenging. Its just an aspect of games that I find fascinating.
I also appreciate abstract games, such as abalone, go and puzzle games like tantrix. There is something to be said to visual and tactile appeal of a game. Games can be art objects. I think this is where the table-top folks come on board.
The situation with computer games is somewhat different, in that the tactile expeience is limited. However, the difference between an ASCII chess game and Chessmaster 9000 is easy to grasp. Additionally, there is the room for artisitic license with data and graphic representation within games. Making your own counters was possible in ASL, but how many of us actually did that? We surely modified the rules to fit our needs. This is the modder, and the rise of VASSAL is a good example of a modding community.
Game developers that allow a certain level of player modification are enhancing thier product. However, from my interactions with the flight sim communitty I also understand that there are limitations to the interaction bewteen artists, game programmers and grognard/historians.
In my opinion, those games that maintain a good sense of scope with respect to bringing all the aspects of a computer game togethor produce economically viable games. If that is the measure of a game's success. In the case of WITP the graphic interface wasn't as important as the level of detail in the number and composition of game's engine/rule-set.
One of my favourites, the Total War series, blends games of differnt scopes. You get an interesting strategic game coupled with a very fun tactical game (which you dont have to play). It was also open to modding by the communitty, which has lead to some very interesting differences of opinions between modding factions.
So, I guess I'm just trying to say that its horses for courses. Some games will always appeal to a limited set of folks. While others will attract a much wider set of interested players. There are a number of reasons why this happens. Enjoy the difference.
Sorry if I sound a bit patronising, I just got on a bit of a roll. I'm sure the rest of you grognards know all this anyway.
Cheers,
|
|
|
|
